Unprecedented amounts of semen - My thoughts on the Chelsea game!!!!!!!!!!!

Got to agree re Vurn, but I think he might well be in for Spurs next week - could see us going one more in midfield given that's where Spurs main goal threat seems to come from at the minute.

So nice to have options for once and make other managers worry about us for a change.

 

Yep as I have said before as well, when HBA comes back, if he plays on the right with (finally) a RB with an attacking threat, it should stop the double teams or triple teams he sees and with Sissoko and Cisse requiring attention, could be real positive!

 

Suprised by the Cisse criticism.

got himself into good positions, produced decent efforts, Cech saved them. Worked hard all game - - ran 25 yards at 93 minutes to head the ball out and break up a Chelsea attack.

If one of his had gone in, everyone would be giving him an 8.

 

Agree with this, I though Cisse put a right shift in and his movement was quality.

In the first half of the season, He was lacking the movement and finishing he had last year. He seems to have now got the movement back so he's getting the opportunities... now just for the finishing.

 

And lets not forget Gouffran either. With him, Sissoko and HBA thats 3 players with serious pace, power and skills that opposition teams would have to worry about. They all know how to finish as well! We should see more magic from HBA as he will have more freedom and if Cisse finds his shooting boots he's bound to have a decent amount of good chances created for him.

 

Hope I'm not getting too irritating by bringing this up again and again, but

Ten minutes later, Ramires picked up a yellow card for a two-footed challenge on Jonas Gutierrez. No danger of a red with Howard Webb in charge though -- this is the man who penalised Nigel de Jong with a yellow in the World Cup final after he kung-fu kicked a man five feet from the ground. Webb deemed the Ramires tackle no worse than a James Perch tame kicking away of the ball, which also drew a yellow.

This sums it up for me.

 

Whilst I agree that Ramires should have got a red, I also believe that Chelsea should have got a penalty for Collocini booting Ba in the face. I know it was accidental as his eyes were on the ball and it wasn't a red because Ba had already headed the ball so was not denying a goal scoring opportunity. However it was a high foot so a foul all day long.

As for comparing the Ramires tackle with Perch kicking the ball away is a bit of a false argument in my opinion. There are only 3 forms of punishment in the game, free kick / penalty, yellow card, red card. For Perch, the free kick has already been given, so he can only get a yellow or red as the rules state that he's committed a further offense so Webb had to yellow card him. As for the Ramires tackle, Webb is known for wanting to keep 22 players on the pitch and to let the game flow as much as possible, especially in the early stages so I'm not surprised that Ramires didn't go off as I'm sure Webb wouldn't have sent off Perch if it had been him diving in instead at that point of the game...

 

I probably should know this, but is every foul in the box a penalty ?

It might sound like a dumb question but if, for example, there was a late challenge on a player who had taken a shot that had either:

a. already crossed the by line, or

b. was about to cross the by line,

is it a penalty ? I can see that the rules my state it is, but it would be a bit fubbish if so - - the attacking team hasn't been denied anything by the foul.

 

In those situations with the ball so far gone then the challenge would probably be deemed to be dangerous play or possibly violent conduct in most cases and would bring a penalty as punishment for the offending player / team rather than to make up for any opportunities the opposition team missed because of it.
I know if Cabs had a shot from outside the box that was going wide and then got clattered by, let's say Catermole to keep it realistic, then I'd be screaming for a booking at the very least all day long. Rules have to be the same in the box as they are outside it...

Having said that however I believe I have seen an occasion where the ball has gone out of play and then a foul has been committed that wasn't punished because the ball was dead. Only seen that once though and I think there was a bit of an uproar about it so not likely to see it again!

 

I can entirely see that it will be a card or not regardless of where the ball is. I was just wondering if it is necessarilly a penalty.

 

Ah right, I get you. I think as it's a direct free kick outside the box then it's a penalty in the box. Should the foul be cause for an indirect free kick outside then it would be that inside as well.
I think leaving this up to interpretation by the refs depending on where the ball was at the time of the foul would cause more issues than it solves so they keep it simple.

I am not fully versed in the rule book, but believe this is how it works.

 

Do you guys remember there was a shot that Raylor took( I believe against Aston Villa), where he was clattered hard after he took the shot. The ball rebounded to Ba who then finished it with aplomb, and that was the end of story there. But it was a terrible hit on Raylor as well, and yet no one said a thing during that time. Nobody even thought it should've been a penalty. Defenders are sometimes given the right to make the challenge on the shot, and the "seeming fouls" have largely been uncalled, until Rafa decided to bring it up... Let me try to find it.



I can't find it, and I gave up.

 

Remember this - Raylor had to be stretchered off - think it was Warnock with the foul?

 

The problem with rules and referees applying them is its pretty open to interpretation. If you've played football you kind of accept if you are kicked in the kind of situation Ba was on Saturday, you're not getting a pen. You certainly wouldn't expect it if you're Colo and definitely not a card of any description. This argument of "anywhere else on the pitch" that is now applied by commentators to hand balls, seeing the ball out of play or tackles after shots is something I don't really agree with. I can see the basis of the argument for sure but I just think there are some unwritten anomalies in football. If I see the ball out of play as it heads towards the byline, thats good defending to me. If I make contact trying to prevent a shot on goal after the shot has gone, its part of my job and the game.

Personally I think attackers have had enough rules changes or interpretations shifted in their favour with our crazy offside rules that allow Hernandez his chance against us, and no pass backs to keepers.